If the WX was so benign as you state then why was the approach clearly so unstable. It surely rates as one of the most hair raising attempts at landing I have ever seen.
Who says the approach is unstable? The approach obviously met with ANA's stable approach criteria (which is the same as just about everybody else) or else the crew would have gone around. How is it 'clearly so unstable'? All you see is the landing, so you have no evidence to support your inference. All you've done is assume the weather was bad, which it wasn't and then apply your false assumption to an imagined hypothesis that the approach was unstable.
What you do see in the news report is the short period before the flare where the nose is lower than a 'normal' approach, indicating the aircraft is likely to be flying close to, or at, the max speed of Vref+20. Shortly thereafter you see a very rapidly 'flare' which,
in my opinion, is instigated too late, thereby rotating the main wheels onto the runway (very positively, indeed). The aircraft then bounced and,
in my opinion, the pilot does the thing that we've been taught NOT to do from day one; he pushes forward on the control column. The rest is pretty obvious.
So, no, it wasn't the weather at the time of this landing that
caused the incident but, rather,
in my opinion, a late flare and a botched reaction to the bounce.......like you get 'over there' in the USA every now and again i.e. this has got nothing to do with Japan or the general standard of their pilots.